Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elżbieta Jabłońska

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep and nominator withdrawal. (non-admin closure) Goldsztajn (talk) 00:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Elżbieta Jabłońska

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see that artist being notable. GizzyCatBella🍁 02:08, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women, and Arts. GizzyCatBella🍁 02:08, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets WP:GNG, among other things. She is the Chair of a University Department and has globally shown her work at prominent galleries. Citations include detailed write up from RS sources. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 02:11, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Above is the opinion of the original author of the article. - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PigeonChickenFish Does she have article about her in any other Wiki? Poland? I just don’t see enough independent sources that would establish notability. - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GizzyCatBella, yes she has an article on Polish Wikipedia and you can see she is part of various project work lists for Wikipedia - spanning back since 2014. A quick google search has a ton of hits (if you are mindful of the name and transliteration of her name). PigeonChickenFish (talk) 02:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
👍 - I can see that now. Okay let’s see what others think. - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 02:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There are enough independent sources most notably Hatje Cantz is a heavy weight in art. The Art Newspaper is also on topic I have experienced. And then there are others as well. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 02:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep as per above arguments HeliosSunGod (talk) 04:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)~~ sockstrike Girth Summit _(blether) 13:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC) [reply]
Note: There are 21 citations, include from The Art Newspaper, Polskie Radio, the Adam Mickiewicz Institute, Hatje Cantz, Routledge, Bloomsbury Publishing, The Brooklyn Rail, and others. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 05:19, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The nominator hasn't given any indication of how the article subject doesn't meet notability. And considering the references already exhibited in the article and their significant coverage of the subject, they appear perfectly notable to me. Silver seren^C 05:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep of course. But do we really need "Elżbieta Jabłońska also known as Elzbieta Jablonska", just because some papers don't bother to use diacritics doesn't mean it's some kind of the second name. What do you think?Marcelus (talk) 08:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Marcelus, I had added it because of search reasons and I see your point and I am okay with removing it. I was mostly concerned that others couldn’t find citations (as it was harder using the diacritics). PigeonChickenFish (talk) 08:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's unnecessary Marcelus (talk) 08:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment only - its not a "second name" its a different transliteration - if I had to type yjis person's name on an English typewriter then you would get that different spelling. People with names in Arabic and Chinese sometimes have several different transliterations of a single name and these are required so that search engines can find them. Victuallers (talk) 20:58, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per all of the above, references adequately meet notability. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note - This can be closed now, as I also now think she might be notable. - GizzyCatBella🍁 21:55, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The subject and her art work are widely cited and recognized internationally with wide coverage that shows notability. Frankly, surprised this was included as an article for deletion. Clearly meets WP:GNG. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 07:56, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Enough sources to be notable. She is the chair of a University Department. NMasiha (talk) 21:01, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.